Sec. 43.23. OBSCENITY. (a) A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and character, he wholesale promotes or possesses with intent to wholesale promote any obscene material or obscene device.
(b) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under Subsection (a) is a state jail felony.
(c) A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and character, he:
(1) promotes or possesses with intent to promote any obscene material or obscene device; or
(2) produces, presents, or directs an obscene performance or participates in a portion thereof that is obscene or that contributes to its obscenity.
(d) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under Subsection (c) is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) A person who promotes or wholesale promotes obscene material or an obscene device or possesses the same with intent to promote or wholesale promote it in the course of his business is presumed to do so with knowledge of its content and character.
(f) A person who possesses six or more obscene devices or identical or similar obscene articles is presumed to possess them with intent to promote the same.
(g) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the person who possesses or promotes material or a device proscribed by this section does so for a bona fide medical, psychiatric, judicial, legislative, or law enforcement purpose.
(h) The punishment for an offense under Subsection (a) or (c) is increased to the punishment for a felony of the second degree if it is shown on the trial of the offense that obscene material that is the subject of the offense visually depicts activities described by Section 43.21(a)(1)(B) engaged in by:
(1) a child younger than 18 years of age at the time the image of the child was made;
(2) an image that to a reasonable person would be virtually indistinguishable from the image of a child younger than 18 years of age; or
(3) an image created, adapted, or modified to be the image of an identifiable child.
(i) In this section, "identifiable child" means a person, recognizable as an actual person by the person's face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or other recognizable feature:
(1) who was younger than 18 years of age at the time the visual depiction was created, adapted, or modified; or
(2) whose image as a person younger than 18 years of age was used in creating, adapting, or modifying the visual depiction.
(j) An attorney representing the state who seeks an increase in punishment under Subsection (h)(3) is not required to prove the actual identity of an identifiable child.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1979, 66th Leg., p. 1975, ch. 778, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1979; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1005, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2013, 83rd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1252 (H.B. 8), Sec. 19, eff. September 1, 2013.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
60
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case:
Burden v. State, 55 S.W.3d 608 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).
Burden v. State, 55 S.W.3d 608 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).
· cites it 3× “” Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(c)(1). We will give effect to the plain language of a statute.”
Villarreal v. State, 267 S.W.3d 204 (Tex. App. 2008).
· cites it 6× “See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 43.23 (c)(1) (Vernon 2003).”
Gholson v. State, 667 S.W.2d 168 (Tex. App. 1984).
· cites it 8× “Gholson (Appellant) guilty of promoting obscene material in violation of TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23 (Vernon Supp.”
Graves v. State, 307 S.W.3d 483 (Tex. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “” Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 43.23 (c) (Vernon Supp.”
Castillo v. State, 79 S.W.3d 817 (Tex. App. 2002).
· cites it 4× “1993) (explaining that court considers evidence presented at trial by both State and defense in determining sufficiency of evidence). As stated previously, in an obscenity case, the State has the burden of establishing the defendant knew the character and content of the material…”
Regalado v. State, 872 S.W.2d 7 (Tex. App. 1994).
· cites it 5× “TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23(c)(1) (Vernon 1989).”
Ex Parte Dave, 220 S.W.3d 154 (Tex. App. 2007).
· cites it 2× “Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 43.23 (c)(1) (Vernon Supp.”
Borkowicz v. State, 802 S.W.2d 115 (Tex. App. 1990).
· cites it 5× “” Subsection (g) is not so labeled and is not an exception to Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 43.23 (Vernon 1989).”
Webber v. State, 21 S.W.3d 726 (Tex. App. 2000).
· cites it 2× “On appeal, appellant asserts that the evidence does not support the jury's verdict; that the statute under which she was convicted is unconstitutional; and that the trial court erred in charging the jury, in admitting inadmissible evidence, and in allowing improper jury argument.”
Rent v. State, 771 S.W.2d 723 (Tex. App. 1989).
· cites it 4× “" TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23 (Vernon 1989).”
Green v. State, 893 S.W.2d 536 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “The issue is whether an acquittal or a retrial is appropriate when a conviction is based on the fact finder's use of an unconstitutional statutory presumption.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(a) — 2 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(a)(1) — 2 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(a)(3) — 1 case
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(c) — 7 cases
Gholson v. State, 667 S.W.2d 168 (Tex. App. 1984).
“Gholson (Appellant) guilty of promoting obscene material in violation of TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23 (Vernon Supp.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(c)(1) — 11 cases
Burden v. State, 55 S.W.3d 608 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).
“” Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(c)(1). We will give effect to the plain language of a statute.”
Castillo v. State, 79 S.W.3d 817 (Tex. App. 2002).
“1993) (explaining that court considers evidence presented at trial by both State and defense in determining sufficiency of evidence). As stated previously, in an obscenity case, the State has the burden of establishing the defendant knew the character and content of the material…”
Regalado v. State, 872 S.W.2d 7 (Tex. App. 1994).
“TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23(c)(1) (Vernon 1989).”
Borkowicz v. State, 802 S.W.2d 115 (Tex. App. 1990).
“” Subsection (g) is not so labeled and is not an exception to Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 43.23 (Vernon 1989).”
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(c)(2) — 3 cases
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(e) — 7 cases
Green v. State, 893 S.W.2d 536 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995).
“The issue is whether an acquittal or a retrial is appropriate when a conviction is based on the fact finder's use of an unconstitutional statutory presumption.”
Gholson v. State, 667 S.W.2d 168 (Tex. App. 1984).
“Gholson (Appellant) guilty of promoting obscene material in violation of TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23 (Vernon Supp.”
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(e)(1) — 1 case
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(f) — 3 cases
Regalado v. State, 872 S.W.2d 7 (Tex. App. 1994).
“TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23(c)(1) (Vernon 1989).”
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(g) — 3 cases
Borkowicz v. State, 802 S.W.2d 115 (Tex. App. 1990).
“” Subsection (g) is not so labeled and is not an exception to Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 43.23 (Vernon 1989).”
Rent v. State, 771 S.W.2d 723 (Tex. App. 1989).
“" TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.23 (Vernon 1989).”
— Tex. Penal Code § 43.23(h) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.